A compendium of the best reporting and commentary surrounding the pivotal 2024 elections in the United States. You won't find horse race coverage here, or the standard "both sides" BS that passes so often for political journalism. What you will find are links, with brief commentary, to work that I believe advances the conversation we should be having about America's – and the world's – future. Remember: Everything is at stake this year. (Unfortunately, some of the work I point to is behind paywalls.)
Democrats are suddenly allowed to say what they mean. No trimming. No “triangulation.” No rhetorical bank shots, no apologies. Really, we haven’t seen anything quite like it since the surprise landslide of Ronald Reagan in 1980 shocked the party of “Give ’em hell” Harry Truman into its modern-day defensive crouch.
Perlstein captures the surprising turn of intent, and rhetorical action, that has emerged in the past few weeks. And about time. For years, as the author notes with context going back decades, Democrats have been letting Republicans set essentially most or all of the terms of debate. If you can frame the debate on your own terms, you have the advantage. Meanwhile, the Democrats have persistently brought handshakes to knife fights. I think Perlstein is giving the Democrats a bit more credit than deserved, given that they are still avoiding serious discussion of some core issues. But they have made welcome progress, long overdue.
Federal Election Commission campaign disclosure reports from 2020 show that much of the money donated to the Trump campaign went into a legal and financial black hole reportedly controlled by Trump family members and close associates. This year’s campaign disclosures are shaping up to be the same. Donors big and small give their hard-earned dollars to candidates with the expectation they will be spent on direct efforts to win votes. They deserve better.
CNN's report last Friday, and a NY Times op-ed piece that connects some other dots, are a reminder of one of Trump world's most notable features: corruption. It's essential to do this kind of reporting, and CNN did a fine job with its story. But journalism always treats each of the endless scandals – there are surely countless more than haven't been noticed or reported – as a one-off. The press can't be bothered to pull it all together – to put stories like this in context and show the staggering breadth and depth of the sleaze. Journalists notice brush fires, report on them, and leave it there every time. For reasons I can't fathom, they never, ever explain that the entire forest is ablaze.
Suddenly, it is Trump’s age that’s the issue, not Biden’s. At her rallies, Harris uses subtle age shade, telling crowds that Trump would “return America to a dark past” and called his comments on her race the “same old show.” Her running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, 60, opts for a more direct diss. Trump, Walz says, is hopelessly “low energy,” “tired” and “needs to get a little rest on the weekends.”
The Politico story doesn't offer anything especially useful about the 2024 election. But it does go back a few presidential election cycles – in what it calls a "greatest hits" approach – to remind us of how the issue of age has been raised in other modern races. What would have made this article much more relevant? Asking why journalist, after their obsession with Biden's age and condition, aren't more interested in Trump's increasingly obvious – and scary – decline, physical and otherwise. For reasons that elude me, that doesn't seem to be an issue worth covering.
That we must even consider taking such a thing seriously is a testament to just how powerfully both men have distorted the nature of our heavily mediated reality through trolling and sheer force of ego. And, unfortunately, I think we should take it seriously! Not because it is at all likely to happen but because it’s worth examining what the entreaty itself reveals about Trump and Musk’s relationship and the relinquishing of a once pivotal platform – X, formerly Twitter – to forces preoccupied with conspiracy and propaganda at this precarious moment.
This commentary says more about the sad state of modern journalism than almost anything else. As Merchant writes, Trump and Musk have something grotesque in common: "Each demands attention the way a flame demands oxygen: incessantly, and at any cost." The cost to the rest of us is significant, because that flame devours much of the oxygen of useful political discourse, not just their lie-filled ranting. Journalism pays so much more attention than the story deserves, because that is how our media work today: chasing shiny objects. Which reminds me, see the next (related) link.
No one comes close to keeping track of Musk's offenses against civility – and free speech that he doesn't like – than Masnick. His story today deeply covers federal judges' corrective moves against blatantly partisan right-wing state officials who appear to be in league with Musk's vendetta against Media Matters, a left-of-center outlet that keeps an eye on "conservative" media. The bottom line is that Musk – like his new pal Trump – is one of the most dangerous enemies of press freedom, and he has powerful friends along with his still-influential platform. Even though Musk has turned (ex)Twitter into a cesspool, a far too many otherwise respectable journalists are still directly supporting his business by actively posting there. It's unconscionable. But hey, I guess that's show business.
Voting is just part of democracy, but it's the essential place to start. Make sure you're registered. Check in the fall, well before Election Day, because in some states Republican officials are removing people, mostly those who tend to vote for Democrats, from voting rolls.
Please send your suggestions
I spend a lot of time looking for essential coverage, and hope you'll help me by letting me know about the good stuff you find. Let me know.
Rick Perlstein
Casey Tolan, Isabelle Chapman, Nelli Black
Brian Merchant
Mike Masnick
